Ding ding ding! Round 2!

Blinkered: having or showing a limited outlook.

Game 4: correctly identified 2 of 3 mafia members. Two mis-lynches; GhostQlyph because we were unaware of the 'no kills on consecutive nights' rule and eyeball226 when in a winning position already; his sacrifice helped secure a town victory.

Game 5: correctly identified 3 of 3 mafia members. One mis-lynch; Taleroth because his posts just seemed scummy - I wasn't the only one thinking this.

What's the point in broadening my horizons when I attack the right people?

Because you also attack the WRONG people!
With your style, it's all black & white.
So you start attacking the wrong person, but still won't stop until they are dead!!

I'd be far more willing to be in a china shop with a bull than be near a rabid dog, but then again that's just a flaw with your comparisons....

Pardon me for asking - and indeed joining the metagaming - but did you not also vote on Fexen's stack in game #5 - with the hammer vote, no less?

Could you please stop arguing which one of you is worse?
I don't care and I don't think it helps anything.

@ pazzer; Why have you picked Thiev?

Don't think he's town.

And your reasons for not thinking he's town?

Completely agree! I still think my original suspicion of nmillar has merit, easily as much as any other theory, but the constant bickering between the two of you has completely overshadowed any merit I might have had...

@Pazzer - I'm all in favour of getting to the point, but surely you can see that posts like you have just made, without backing them up, just come across as scummy? Vote Thiev, then give as a reason 'Dont think he's Town'.

The only way we as town can win is by information - if you suspect someone you need to give a good outline as to why, make some sort of case - in that way pressure is applied and slips are made. Just saying 'dont think he's town' helps not at all and just serves to make things more confusing, exactly what Mafia would want.

His post where he said i'm no harm to town. I don't see it as a slip up instead I think he's 3rd party.

That's correct, but he wasn't subject to one of my extensive attacks. The Fexen vote was a panic move when we were running out of time and, as I stated at the time, I didn't realise it was the hammer vote when I cast it.

Agreed. However, I will continue to defend myself against accusations.

vote pazzer because it seems like he was trying to slip the vote on Thiev in without really drawing attention to himself and that comes off to me as rather scummy. Though he is correct that we are approaching the deadline rapidly.

Never fear I'm now here, after reading pages and pages of information, I have a few ideas.

For starters I feel the ones we want are the lurkers, hiding out of the limelight whilst us townies argue with ourselves. Thats how they get us, Confusion!

So I'm going to vote Robbeasy, pops up now and again with only a nmillar is scum post.

...Pardon me for a post that's potentially asking for it, but personally I thought I'd been lurking more. I did disappear from ViolatorX's radar entirely earlier on, after all. :P

@NMillar - all right, just thought I'd mention it.

@Pazzer - Your recent posts on Thiev do seem to be trying to say as little as possible each time... It's rather worrying. Also, I'm wondering why you'd see third parties as the priority to target as opposed to players you consider to be Mafia - isn't there something about that approach that's generally considered a scumtell? I'm not entirely sure. I suppose it could be less noteworthy due to this game being stated to be a somewhat unusual one, and thus pure paranoia, but still...

Few pages back you fingered 7 people as mafia and you have no good suspects now?